|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How did Monkeys get to South America? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Other sources say it takes more than once because there were natural competitors in south america at the time. First of all, name these sources. Second, how the heck would it help for it to happen "more than once". If monkeys turn up, are outcompeted, and die out, then this doesn't pave the way for them to make it a second time.
There are other threads on the internet that have already covered this debate. At 35 million years the separation between continents was about 1400 km. Between which continents? I posted how geologists reconstruct the distance between northwest Africa and northeast South America. I didn't figure out the distance, I just pointed out that the distance between the continents was smaller than it is today. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Some evolution experts think the raft from africa borders on ridiculous. Quote them.
The so-called "millions of years of rafting opportunity" never existed unless monkeys found a time machine. Substantiate your statement, or consider the possibility that primatologists know more about primatology than you do.
Here's an opening post from someone considerably more expert than you are: Hello? How did you acertain his degree of expertise? This guy who calls himself "scmarlowe" posting on a cryptozoology forum? How did this unknown person with no references to actual obseravations acquire his considerable expertise, in your eyes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2508 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Engineer writes: Here's a recent press release:http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2005/03/050329134437.htm A lot of African animals came from North America. The raft went the other way. ;-) You're presenting evidence against the point you seem to be trying to make. Of course the rafting can go both ways, and across any oceans. While mammals being washed out to sea and clinging to some kind of flotsam would be common, voyaging from one continent to another would be fairly rare. This is because it requires a combination of circumstances, each individual one being common or likely, but getting them all together statistically rare, but arguably almost inevitable at some time given the time scale. Let's look at some likely requirements. (a) The current being in the right direction. (b) The prevailing winds being in the right direction. (c) Two mammals of different sex being on the same raft. (d) The raft/tree holding together for the duration or not sinking for the duration. (e) Food available on the raft (leaves and possibly fruits). (f) Enough rainfall during the voyage for our travellers to be able to lick water off their raft and keep from dehydrating. Now, you can see that all these occurrences individually could be common, two mammals of opposite sex clinging to the raft being probably the least frequent event. So, as I said in an earlier post, it's like tossing a series of heads once you've got the two monkeys on a raft. It might only take several hundred pairs of monkeys on a raft off the coast of Africa to get the other 5 requirements at the same time. I see no reason for incredulity at all. I'm sure that even less likely events have happened. And Dr. Adequate's green monkey rafting a greater distance seems to make it clear that it's probably the "two monkeys of different sex" requirement (and the establishment of a breeding population through a bottleneck) that limits the frequency of such historical events more than the actual rafting. Edited by bluegenes, : spelling
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Engineer Member (Idle past 5546 days) Posts: 65 From: KY, USA Joined: |
"Some evolution experts think the raft from africa borders on ridiculous."
quote: That will take some research but I'll give you a hint: Floating Islands on the ocean fall in the category of mythology: Floating island - Wikipedia(fiction) "The so-called "millions of years of rafting opportunity" never existed unless monkeys found a time machine."
quote: And perhaps they know more than you as well. I provided the link to Dr. Boch's presentation in the science journal. Did you bother reading it? If not, then I can't help you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Engineer Member (Idle past 5546 days) Posts: 65 From: KY, USA Joined: |
quote: I think there is a better case for rodents than monkeys. What time window do you propose? Why is a parallel evolution of monkeys from creatures of similar origin so unacceptable in two different locations? This is one of the issues I have against the theory of evolution in it's current form. If an event can happen once then it can happen again. It should be repeatable. If monkeys can live quite well in both South America and Africa even today, then they should be able to evolve as such from a common ancestor. You need more evidence to support that this is indeed happening, not just with monkeys but with other species as well including humans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
Floating Islands on the ocean fall in the category of mythology You do know that cars are mentioned in fiction too? The artical on your wiki link is non-fiction. It seems you may be confused with this:
wiki says writes: For floating islands in fiction, see Floating island (fiction). This is referring the reader elsewhere.
I provided the link to Dr. Boch's presentation in the science journal. Did you bother reading it? I may have misread the artical but I thought it was an unpublished piece of garaduate work, rather than by Boch. Edited by Larni, : Added point about Boch.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2508 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Engineer writes: I think there is a better case for rodents than monkeys. On the basis of numbers alone, they have an advantage, and we know that they raft easily on our ships.
What time window do you propose? A big one. Are you talking about estimating a time for the actual monkey event?
Why is a parallel evolution of monkeys from creatures of similar origin so unacceptable in two different locations? The genomes should give us an approximate time of divergence, and even allowing for maximum error, this would be long after the separation of the continents.
This is one of the issues I have against the theory of evolution in it's current form. The things that we're talking about are details of natural history, not the theory of evolution, which would just indicate that all primates have common ancestry and have diverged by processes involving mutation, selection and genetic drift. ToE doesn't have an opinion on rafting.
If an event can happen once then it can happen again. It should be repeatable. If monkeys can live quite well in both South America and Africa even today, then they should be able to evolve as such from a common ancestor. Those groups did have a common ancestral species. What you seem to be suggesting is that an early primate existed when the continents were conjoined, and then evolved separately into convergent monkey like species on both continents after the divide. Convergent (and parallel) evolution happens, but not to a very profound extent, and genetics and the fossil record would tell us if that was the case. The dates are wrong, hence the rafting hypothesis. Think of convergent evolution like this. The USA could have another civil war, and you could call that history repeating itself. But the nature and details of the civil war would inevitably be profoundly different from the last one, as history cannot literally repeat itself in any complex way.
You need more evidence to support that this is indeed happening, not just with monkeys but with other species as well including humans. To support that what is happening? Could you be more precise?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kuresu Member (Idle past 2543 days) Posts: 2544 From: boulder, colorado Joined: |
That will take some research but I'll give you a hint: Floating Islands on the ocean fall in the category of mythology: Floating island - Wikipedia(fiction) "The so-called "millions of years of rafting opportunity" never existed unless monkeys found a time machine." You're kidding, right? This ranks up there with your claim that 12mm is .12cm. Notice what the wiki says:quote: Really now, you can do better than this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
I have walked on floating islands. Complete with small (couple of meters high) conifers growing in/on them.
They blew back and forth across the lake and (from the trees on them) had existed for at least a few years. They are not myth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
This is one of the issues I have against the theory of evolution in it's current form. Finally we cut to the chase. We have been asking for your hypothesis all along. Your whole purpose in this thread is to try to debunk evolution. But as ID'ers tend to do, since they have no science to back them up, they try to develop arguments as to why evolution cannot be true. Why not instead come up with evidence that proves something other than evolution? Oh wait, that would take science. We have given you many solutions to the rafting monkey issue. If you refuse to accept them that is your issue. Every objection you have had has been given a solution. Dr. Bloch does not strengthen your argument. His is another hypothesis, but it is not at all an indictment against evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
That will take some research but I'll give you a hint: Floating Islands on the ocean fall in the category of mythology: Floating island - Wikipedia(fiction) Hello? You stated that "Some evolution experts think the raft from africa borders on ridiculous." Challenged to quote them, you refer me to a wikipedia article, presumably not written by an "evolution expert", which confirms that floating islands exist and does not mention monkeys in any way.
And perhaps they know more than you as well. I provided the link to Dr. Boch's presentation in the science journal. Did you bother reading it? If not, then I can't help you. Hello? You wrote that ""The so-called "millions of years of rafting opportunity" never existed unless monkeys found a time machine." I ask you to substantiate that statement, and you refer me to Dr Boch, who says no such thing. He does say that it is "at least possible" that primates originated in America.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 315 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I think there is a better case for rodents than monkeys. What time window do you propose? Why is a parallel evolution of monkeys from creatures of similar origin so unacceptable in two different locations? This is one of the issues I have against the theory of evolution in it's current form. If an event can happen once then it can happen again. It should be repeatable. If monkeys can live quite well in both South America and Africa even today, then they should be able to evolve as such from a common ancestor. You need more evidence to support that this is indeed happening, not just with monkeys but with other species as well including humans. I'm not sure what you're getting at. New World and Old World monkeys did evolve from a common ancestor. This is exactly what is being claimed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Bluegenes.
bluegenes writes: (c) Two mammals of different sex being on the same raft. A pregnant female with a long enough gestation period might suffice. If the mating season is timed with the monsoon, pregnancy and flooding may coincide regularly, presenting many opportunities for pregnant females to raft out to sea. -Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 2728 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Engineer.
Engineer writes: Why is a parallel evolution of monkeys from creatures of similar origin so unacceptable in two different locations? If monkeys can live quite well in both South America and Africa even today, then they should be able to evolve as such from a common ancestor. It's really quite simple. Ever since the break-up of Gondwana, South America was not connected to any other continent (not even North America) until about 3 million years ago. When the two Americas finally connected, it resulted in what is known as the Great American Interchange (Wiki link). By the time of the Great American Interchange, all of North America's primates had apparently gone extinct, so that none were left to colonize South America 3 million years ago. Furthermore, when there were primates in North America (millions of years earlier), they were an outgroup to all modern primates. This means that lemurs are more closely related to South American monkeys than these extinct North American primates were, so proposing these North American primates as the ancestors of South America's primates is like proposing that tigers evolved from hyenas while the rest of the cats evolved from bears. Fossil monkeys have been found in South America dating to much earlier than the Great American Interchange, which means that, either two very different groups of animals evolved to become more similar to one another genetically than either was to their respective closest relatives, or some monkeys crossed the ocean. Basically, the options are like this:
Both sound very bizarre, but one of them is actually marginally possible, while the other is not. -Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluegenes Member (Idle past 2508 days) Posts: 3119 From: U.K. Joined: |
Bluejay writes: A pregnant female with a long enough gestation period might suffice. It might, yes, but I was giving our travellers a bit more genetic diversity to kick start the population. Also, so far as evidence is concerned, I happened to know about the example I gave earlier in the thread of a healthy wild population of mammals starting from a pair.
Island sheep flock
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024